Portfolio Inclusion Question
null
Hi all, even though this is my first post on Polycount, I've been doing modeling, texturing, animation, and PBR development for around half a decade. Entirely self-taught, and I have quite a bit of work I'd like to put in my portfolio but I'm having a bit of difficulty discerning whether or not it would be considered fair or not to do so.
So, here's my situation -
While I have some great examples of entirely self-made hardsurface and organic character examples, I also have a number of examples I've created that are derived from the purchased/freely available work of others, all of which I make sure are royalty-free license. (All of the original models I derive my work from are given/sold by their creators under completely royalty free licensing.) I've often found myself entranced by the challenge of fixing and breathing new life into models their original makers have deemed unusable or unfit for production work. (This is usually due to the conclusion that the mesh is beyond saving because of bad topology, modeling errors, and/or the original creator not wanting to finish it.)
So that's where I tend to come in, and I end up either repairing or creating an entirely new mesh with good topology by using the original abandoned mesh as a reference. For me, personally, it has saved me what has probably added up to several months of time over the past half decade.
The resulting retopo'd mesh is then UVed, lightmapped, textured, and optimized entirely by me, myself and I. (I've included images to reference all this in the bottom of this post.)
Now the dilemma - Are such examples of work legitmately acceptable for portfolio work?
One the one hand, there is a significant amount of work required to get from a high poly mesh with poor topology to an optimized and textured game-ready model, and since the original license are entirely royalty free, such is permitted under the model's usage rights.
But on the other hand, these examples aren't 100% made by me. It's just the getting it to the point where it can actually be used effectively is my doing. So, if I had to guess, I'd say that, and I feel as though I'm being generous to myself here, that only about 75% of the work is mine.
I'm at a loss as to whether or not including such examples in my portfolio is professionally ethical or not.
Any thoughts, advice, or previous experience would be immeasurably helpful!
Thank you all so much for taking the time to read this post and for any and all help you are able to provide!
Riley L.
So, here's my situation -
While I have some great examples of entirely self-made hardsurface and organic character examples, I also have a number of examples I've created that are derived from the purchased/freely available work of others, all of which I make sure are royalty-free license. (All of the original models I derive my work from are given/sold by their creators under completely royalty free licensing.) I've often found myself entranced by the challenge of fixing and breathing new life into models their original makers have deemed unusable or unfit for production work. (This is usually due to the conclusion that the mesh is beyond saving because of bad topology, modeling errors, and/or the original creator not wanting to finish it.)
So that's where I tend to come in, and I end up either repairing or creating an entirely new mesh with good topology by using the original abandoned mesh as a reference. For me, personally, it has saved me what has probably added up to several months of time over the past half decade.
The resulting retopo'd mesh is then UVed, lightmapped, textured, and optimized entirely by me, myself and I. (I've included images to reference all this in the bottom of this post.)
Now the dilemma - Are such examples of work legitmately acceptable for portfolio work?
One the one hand, there is a significant amount of work required to get from a high poly mesh with poor topology to an optimized and textured game-ready model, and since the original license are entirely royalty free, such is permitted under the model's usage rights.
But on the other hand, these examples aren't 100% made by me. It's just the getting it to the point where it can actually be used effectively is my doing. So, if I had to guess, I'd say that, and I feel as though I'm being generous to myself here, that only about 75% of the work is mine.
I'm at a loss as to whether or not including such examples in my portfolio is professionally ethical or not.
Any thoughts, advice, or previous experience would be immeasurably helpful!
Thank you all so much for taking the time to read this post and for any and all help you are able to provide!
Riley L.
Replies
If another candidate has shown work that's just as complex but was made entirely from scratch, and the employer looks at yours but sees a disclaimer, who are they going to choose?
These models all came to be because of my own game development needs, and being only me, such things helped speed up the process considerably. So I became curious about their usability as portfolio examples.
Of course, this is just one viewpoint.
Now notice that the rocks aren't the main focus of this piece, and in the description I add that the rocks and ground material were Megascans. I'd say if you're an environment artist, you should steer away from using ready-props that you populate a level with. Just as I wouldn't go through and use ready made guns and ammo belts or what-have-you as props for my characters if that makes sense. I would say if you do want to use them, use them as sparingly as possible and attach appropriate credit where it's due.